The care of civilians during a time of conflict has two arguments Sedgwick’s utility argument and Doctrine of Double Effect or Doctrine of Double Effect prime. I will argue for the Doctrine of Double Effect on the grounds it provide a clear view on what is considering the right actions. While Sidgwicks view allows for all actions to be consider just if framed correctly. Secondly, I will argue that Doctrine of Double Effect prime provides a greater respect to civilians by narrowing its aim. This is due to the update of the Doctrine of Double Effect by Walzer. Civilians require due care during a time of war and through the use Doctrine of Double effect along with Doctrine of Double Effect prime provides the most care. War presents this dilemma …show more content…
Sedgwick answer to this problem would be “Any act of force that contributes in significant way to winning the war is likely to be permissible”(walzer). The mission is to search the town thus military necessity; in this instance kicking the door down is allowed. If necessity allows anything than one must weigh the use of force thus the second rule is proportionality. The second rule of Sedgwick’s utility addresses the use of force to obtain the required outcome. The proportionality of force relies on the solider in charge if a good moral leader. Then one may assume kicking the door is the right amount of force required to obtain victory, in this sense would be opening the door, this is the end one hopes to achieve. If the solider in charge takes action against the door and a window the use of force would be out of proportion. This could be compared weighing each option on a scale of good and bad. The attempt would be made to balance each scale so not to be out of balance. The door would be placed on one side of the scale while the action of breaching the door on the other. Thus the action and the required out come is balanced or proportionate. The window when placed on this scale is not required to enter the house the scale is out of proportion. Sedgwicks answer to this